MOTM

While I mostly agree, I doubt that you could get too many audiophiles to
agree on what "accurate reproduction" is.  And they might not know it when
they do hear it; you'd have to be familiar with the absolute source to know
for certain.  So while they may like one system over another because it's
more revealing or whatnot-- is that really more accurate, or is it simply
more pleasing?  Otherwise, there would be a clear champion / best
manufacturer-- it must be subjective.  So there really can't be a "right"
way for a stereo to sound, can there?

--PBr, who is plain happy with his "cheap" Cambridge Soundworks system.  :)

-----Original Message-----
From: ivancu@... [mailto:ivancu@...]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 5:11 PM
To: motm@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [motm] [OT] Do you hear what I hear...?



In a message dated 6/14/01 1:07:27 PM, noise@... writes:

<< This is an article about audiophiles, their compulsion to upgrade the
equipment, and the expense of their habits.  ... Makes me think about all
the 
MOTM vs. Moog vs. what-not arguements >>

The main difference is that these "audiophiles" are all looking for the same

thing; accurate reproduction.  They're using $1,200 interconnect cables
where 
the original recording used Belden mic cables with Switchcraft connectors.  
Silliness, in my opinion.

A synthesizer is a musical instrument.  Various components affect the 
performance, thereby giving character to a particular brand or model.  There

is no "right" way a synthesizer should sound.